Even then, those SPAAs are DOA. “But then planes wouldn’t have a chance” that’s the point. You should be punished for playing planes in a GROUND match.
1 Like
You should punish planes for playing poorly.
Forcing them low, forcing them to do tactics that are less effective, that’s SPAA-CAS balance.
You can right now do the tactic on live server what they did on dev.
You’ll 100% be safe, and your explosives will be more effective cause 570kg of effective explosive filler on GBU-31.
Of course you’ll be less effective than IR AGM spam, which is the primary thing that the new SPAA is impacting.
1 Like
Eh, I’m a firm believer in Tanks Only. I was actually excited for the new SPAA since I thought the new stuff would bring balance (AKA making CAS players fear). Nope, instead they destroyed every single missile for them (IRIS-T was nerfed from 60Gs to 40Gs in the first day, not including the effective distance to fire from or to even get an elim). Now top tier is going to be even more hellish.
3 Likes
SLM seems to be decent against CAS which is good news.
First dev server information shouldn’t be laid as fact.
As for what I actually want to respond to.
I 100% love the tank only arguments over people complaining about the fact it takes more spawns to get similar rewards as game modes without multiple lives.
Yea ik driving can be boring but maps need to be bigger anyways. City maps should get removed from top tier imo. Most of the maps were made when t5 was top tier and it was completely fine. But now u can go twice or 3 times faster and having insane range of weapon. Same with ARB
3 Likes
Here we go again… city maps are as realistic as any other map type.
I’m going to cite real life militaries, because they know more than players do.
Militaries prefer areas of low flanking opportunities; this is why they dislike urban environments, forests, and terrain heavy ares. They do their best to avoid ares of flanking opportunity.
You can argue they hate ares with flanking routes.
Infantry IRL plays a role in those flanking routes, which don’t exist in War Thunder.
Players clearly prefer maps with flanking routes such as with Sweden, Euro Province, Pradesh, Iberian Castle, etc over wide open maps with low flanking routes such as Fields of Normandy, old Port Novo, and Sands of Sinai [despite Sands getting more flanking routes when it was remade].
Open maps play a role, but open brawling gets boring fast and people like to mix it up with more flanking routes; Sands of Sinai is among my favorite maps after all.
Oh, and modern tank gun ranging is 0 - 4000 meters typically. Obviously that has been extended to 5500 meters in instances.
Just as WW2 guns have extended beyond their effective ranges.
1 Like
Alvis and his nonsense … 🤦♂️
5 Likes
@Steelbeast
You’re more than welcome to only like open maps with little flanking just like real militaries.
Claiming it’s nonsense to like flanking opportunities is looking down on most players though.
1 Like
You do know you can reply to people, you don’t have to @ them right?
Anyway,
Players clearly prefer maps with flanking routes such as with Sweden, Euro Province, Pradesh, Iberian Castle, etc over wide open maps with low flanking routes such as Fields of Normandy, old Port Novo, and Sands of Sinai [despite Sands getting more flanking routes when it was remade].
Source for this claim?
Open maps play a role, but open brawling gets boring fast and people like to mix it up with more flanking routes; Sands of Sinai is among my favorite maps after all.
Personal opinion
Oh, and modern tank gun ranging is 0 - 4000 meters typically. Obviously that has been extended to 5500 meters in instances.
This is nonense. A challenger 1 killed an iraqi t-55 at 5.1 km in the 1st gulf war. This is nothing in the tanks preventing combat at those ranges.
1 Like
No I’m looking down on a crap you are posting about IRL doctrines/tactics/armies.
Open terrain does not affect ability to flank IRL, it actually promotes it… shocking right ?
Me: “Crews have exceeded effective ranges of their guns.” Me, referencing the time a Challenger 1 fragged a tank from over 5km away.
And you somehow claim that is nonsense while agreeing with me that it happened…
The source for the claim is the maps everyone gets.
The most common maps you, myself, and everyone gets are the preferred maps of players on average.
The voting system impacts the matchmaker.
@Steelbeast
Militaries disagree with you about open terrain.
They choose open terrain because it gives them better visibility, better visibility = less flanking routes.
Visibility and flanking are opposites.
Me: “Crews have exceeded effective ranges of their guns.” Me, referencing the time a Challenger 1 fragged a tank from over 5km away.
And you somehow claim that is nonsense while agreeing with me that it happened…
You said, and I quote : “Oh, and modern tank gun ranging is 0 - 4000 meters typically. Obviously that has been extended to 5500 meters in instances.”. That implies the tanks are ranged and incapable of firing over 4km.
The source for the claim is the maps everyone gets.
The most common maps you, myself, and everyone gets are the preferred maps of players on average.
The voting system impacts the matchmaker.
Likes and dislikes have zero impact on the matchmaker. The maps gaijin chooses to implement are often met with derision due to their design. Also, when was the last pure city map introduced? Sun city?
1 Like
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
Again, for the billionth time :
The kh is mainly an issue due to speed and warhead combined with other issues.
8 Likes
Are you referring
It is a clear as a day you never been to military and all you know is from a games… so don’t lecture about military, since you know nothing.
Do you even realize there are other ways to obscure enemy vision or that you can flank even in plain sight ?
You don’t understand the essence of the problem. You gave the example of missiles that fly almost three times slower than the Kh-38, and have less explosives. You could have compared it with the GBU-39 with the same success. And also say, look, the US also has an analogue of the KH-38. What are you not happy about?
Reduce the speed of the X-38ML and MT to Mach 1 and no one will complain anymore.
1 Like
I always wondered why people mix and match Cyrillic with latinic for these missiles.
I will be happy, but I doub that the cmplaining will stop.
I always call it X-38, but because the X-38 Prototype has the same name, I started writing it as KH-38, but sometimes I forget it.
It seems to me that there is no exact definition of how to write correctly.
2 Likes